arguemnt 160 lornazhang

lornazhangUID: 2743693

While it appears that facts presents in the argument contribute to the conclusion that certain compound should used by students with poor memory and concentration to improve their performance in school, with close scrutiny of each fact the argument suffers from several flaws, which renders it unconvincing. First of all, the argument unfairly assumes that the reason why the
rats in the experiment restore lost memory is the use of PEP directly. In fact it is entirely possible that the use of PEP lead to changes in other parts of the body, which have an effect on the memory of rats. Even assuming that PEP, indeed, help the rats recover memory, there is no evidence provided that PEP will carry a similar results on humans. Human have a different body structure from the rats, it is hasty to draw a conclusion about human just based on a result of rats experiment.
The argument also indicate that students’ problems of poor memory and difficulty in concentrating and human’s growing old stem the same factor, which both involved with PEP. But the author fails to provide evidence to substantiate it. It is largely possible that the reason that cause students’ problem is their subjective willing, they do not like study or do not interest in what they are learning so they cannot make good use of their strategy of memory and are not able to concentrate on their task. However, the memory problems when people grow old is just because
the body condition gets worse with aging, it has a totally different function on the young and old people.

Finally, the argument assumes that the memory and concentration is the only factor that determines students’ performance in school, and poor memory and difficulties in concentrating would lead to a serious performance, but the author neglect to mention other factor that also have an effect on students’ performance such as the motivation, personality and attitudes. The performance in school is the outcome of interaction between the environmental and innate factors.
Also, it unfairly claims that the compounds could improve the students’ concentration because the argument does not offer anything that the same compounds improve rats’ concentration but only their learning and memory. In sum, only after evaluating all the ideas might one agree that students with poor memory and concentration could improve their performance in school by using some certain compounds.

how_toUID: 2943936

修改意见

彼年豆蔻UID: 2791778

While it appears that facts presents in the argument contribute to the conclusion that certain compound should used by students with poor memory and concentration to improve their performance in school, with close scrutiny of each fact the argument suffers from several flaws, which renders it unconvincing. First of all, the argument unfairly assumes that the reason why the
rats in the experiment restore lost memory is the use of PEP directly. In fact it is entirely possible that the use of PEP lead to changes in other parts of the body, which have an effect on the memory of rats. Even assuming that PEP, indeed, help the rats recover memory, there is no evidence provided that PEP will carry a similar results on humans. Human have a different body structure from the rats, it is hasty to draw a conclusion about human just based on a result of rats experiment.（可以将这一整段分为首段和正文段第一段）
The argument also indicates that students’ problems of poor memory and difficulty in concentrating and human’s growing old stem the same factor, 这句读不通which both involved with PEP. But the author fails to provide evidence to substantiate it. It is largely possible that the reason that cause students’ problem is their subjective willing, they do not like study or do改为are not interest in what they are learning so they cannot make good use of their strategy of memory and are not able to concentrate on their task. However, the memory problems when people grow old is just becausethe body condition gets worse with aging, it has a totally different function on the young and old people.一段只驳一个主要问题

Finally, the argument assumes that the memory and concentration is the only factor that determines students’ performance in school, and poor memory and difficulties in concentrating would lead to a serious performance, but the author neglect to mention other factor that also have an effect on students’ performance such as the motivation, personality and attitudes. The performance in school is the outcome of interaction between the environmental and innate factors.
Also, it unfairly claims that the compounds could improve the students’ concentration because the argument does not offer anything that the same compounds improve rats’ concentration but only their learningrats没有提learning （我觉得这一点问题应该出在集中注意力与记忆力好根本没有因果关系）and memory. In sum, only after evaluating all the ideas might one agree that students with poor memory and concentration could improve their performance in school by using some certain compounds.这一段也与结尾段分开写。